Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42283023›Full record

ArticleBehavior analysis in practice2025

A Clinical Tutorial on Using a Concurrent Operant Analysis in the Assessment and Treatment of Problem Behavior.

Kayla R Randall, Michael P Kranak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior analysis in practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Kayla R RandallDepartment of Psychology, Georgia Southern University-Armstrong.ORCID 0000-0002-7291-5547
Michael P KranakDepartment of Human Development and Child Studies, Oakland University.ORCID 0000-0001-9697-3701

Funding

Using Behavioral Economics to Mitigate Relapse of Problem Behavior in an Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities PopulationR21HD113794 · NICHD · OAKLAND UNIVERSITY · PI KRANAK, MICHAEL · 2024 to 2024
$426k
Optimizing Dimensions of Reinforcement to Enhance Behavioral InterventionsR21HD113881 · NICHD · AUBURN UNIVERSITY AT AUBURN · PI FALLIGANT, JOHN · 2024 to 2025
$385k
NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD113794NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD113881
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its inception over four decades ago, numerous types and modifications to functional analysis (FA) have been published, likely in part to provide practitioners with a feasible, acceptable, safe, and ecologically valid assessment to inform the treatment of problem behavior. Even so, there are still cases in which an FA is not possible in a given setting or yields undifferentiated results, making conclusions from the FA difficult to interpret. Rather than relying on less rigorous and precise assessment methods (e.g., indirect reports) as part of the functional behavior assessment (FBA) process to inform treatment, a practitioner could employ a concurrent operant analysis (COA). A COA is an assessment that relies on direct observation and experimental manipulations that may be useful for supplementing the FBA process when an FA is not ideal or possible. Further, COAs may be beneficial in that they may avoid the potential drawbacks and criticisms (e.g., evoking problem behavior) that may be more likely associated with FAs than COAs. Despite the benefits of a COA, it has been slow to appear in research for the assessment and treatment of problem behavior. In this clinical tutorial, we provide a comprehensive, step-by-step description using hypothetical, illustrative examples, along with several resources to assist in developing, implementing, and analyzing a COA.

Indexed as

choiceconcurrent operant analysisproblem behaviorreinforcement-based intervention

Identifiers

PMID42283023
PMCPMC13251873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.